Last week was the third international ACM workshop on Personalized Access to Cultural Heritage (PATCH ’14). In light of our current work with the Winnipeg Art Gallery on an interactive case for Inuit Art, we submitted a short paper explaining the design framework we used to design the case. Unfortunately, neither author was able to travel to Haifa (Guo and I were processing our residence permits in Canada and Pourang was on leave) and therefore could not present the paper, but the organizers published it so we could discuss it. Here.

I think using transparent displays at exhibitions is one of the really cool things. And even if it goes without saying, it’s not hard to find most transparent display manufacturers touting their displays as the perfect equipment for showcasing products. However, we believe they do more than just put things in boxes. The aim of our paper is to reveal the aspects that need to be considered when designing such systems. To do this, we carried out a series of studies in various museums that led us to determine the requirements for transparent exhibition cases. The requirements include:

• To support exploration from various angles according to artifact needs.
• To link information to objects in an accessible way.
• To present information in a non-intrusive and intuitive manner.
• To facilitate information scaffolding around the idea of ​​layers of interpretation.
• To support collaborative interactions.
• To enable open exploration.

Based on these requirements we scan previous project literature, talk to other researchers, analyze existing installations, etc… and combine all this information into a design space definition. I think this is the most important contribution of this paper, and can be used by anyone designing this type of system:

As you can see, this framework presents dimensions that guide very specific design decisions. I really liked, for example, the display coverage, which shows that not all sides of the case should be used for visual output but that the transparent side is also actually convenient for supporting other visitors who are not interacting. As examples of the types of cases that our design framework helps design, we present two mock designs:

Figure 4 on paper: Two case examples of interactive exhibitions that meet six requirements. A) Cylindrical casing, insert shows IR LED and ultrasonic distance sensor. B) Wall casing, text aligned.

You can get a copy of our paper here. The following is the abstract of our paper:

Interactive technologies in museums enhance the visit experience
by providing contextual information and fostering collaboration
and participation. In this paper we revisit the design of the
ubiquitous transparent exhibition case from a museum learning
perspective. Transparent cases with interactive properties can
complement other museum technologies and mitigate some of
their shortcomings, such as the group isolation caused by audio
guides and mobile devices. This paper focuses on the design of
interactive cases and makes three contributions. First, based on
field observations and interviews we present a list of requirements
for interactive cases. Second, we propose a design space with
dimensions grouped around the themes of hardware, interaction
and information design. Our design space suggests interactive
cases which present collocated information at increasing levels of
detail, facilitate social interaction, and integrate with other
technologies. Third, we demonstrate our design space through
sample case designs and discuss the general technical challenges.


Resource

• Hincapié-Ramos, JD, Guo, X. and Irani, P. 2014. Designing Interactive Transparent Exhibition Cases. Proceedings of the third international ACM workshop on Personalized Access to Cultural Heritage (PATCH ’14). February 2014. ACM.